User blog:Winrobee/A Heirarchy of Largest Number Concepts
The Largest Numbers, a Hierarchy 1. I have an idea about a number called an Intellection, which is the largest number which can be generated by one intelligent consciousness. The definition has to include rules for what is a single interacting consciousness, and for what are the physical laws in which the (finite) consciousness operates. For example, the Poincaré Recurrence Time indicates that there is a limiting time parameter/scale beyond which repetitions are willy-nilly, and thus not the product of intelligence. And the speed of light restrictions indicate that there's a heavily related space dimension, too. 2. We could also propose a number called a Civilization, which might be the limits of a number that results (remember, we go a finite amount, and then stop) from within an infinite field of (about limit-size) intellegences that act like an agar within which a number-generating develops. There also has to be defined the difference between the fortuition generated by the specific initial layout, and just fortuition which could grow the numbers to any size with enough tries. A characteristic size, that is, that goes with the limits of intellegences and civilizations. The Intellection and the Civilization could also define a number of some kind of things that the principles of the Intellection and the Civilization could specify in a collection; an Intellection of atoms, or a Civilization of people. The Intellection-Civilization series could be extended indefinitely: 3. a Realization, the largest number, under those rules of universe, that can be generated by any finite extrapolation or improvement of the agar principle. 4. a Specification, largest number that can be generated by any finite extrapolation or improvement on what the rules of the universe are (does not necessarily support things like intellegence, but has an analog to the characteristic size stipulation). 5. A Manifestation, the largest number that could be DIS-assembled by any agar with any universe's rules (there has to be a proper standard for what is complete disassembly). 6. A Speculation. The largest number that could be IMPLIED under any rules/agars, or principles of assembly/disassembly, even if nothing final need be known or proved (being part of the process remains a mystery to civilizations actually working. 7. A Rationalization. The largest number which, in fact, has meaning to be the largest number, such that all PARTS of the meaning can separately be defined, after the fashion of a civilization's kind of defining (but by some analog beyond civilizations'). Thus, the limits in #6 create the basic units of conception of what happens in the number's generation. There could be a continuation of the series from here. And we could define SO(n) to be the nth one of these.This sequence could define a function SO(n), where n is which one of these; the sequence could be recursed and diagonalized, etc, of course. SO stands for Systems of Order. 8. The Recognition. The largest number which could be accepted to be the largest number under any rules like the ones introduced earlier in the series (to be well-defined). E.g. there doesn't have to be actually someone possible to do the accepting. 9. The Intimation. The largest number implicit in an association generated by principle #8. That is, members of the association are individually generated with principle #8. But I'm not sure this generates finite numbers greater than SO(8). Probably, the rules of association are generated by associations of things based on #8. 10. The Intrusion. Now, I would like to remind you all, here, that, obviously, the exact definition of the function could not be given concisely: otherwise we could generate an even larger Intellection by anything like simple application of a recursion. What we can do here is demonstrate the approximation of principles. And this is a way to reach SO(10), since we can invoke generalization to say #10 is the largest number generable by any finite relative to grouping of #9's. The worst approximation of the worst approximation. 11. The Deliberation. This is by definition not a description of #10, but...the largest number where any #9 encodes for any extrapolation of defining. The most extreme complication of encrypting. 12. The Communication. The largest finite number which can be given recognition by complications e.g. of recognition. 13. The Satiation. The largest finite number that can be an improvement in size under any improvement over recognitions. 14. The Liberation. The largest finite number that exists that is derived with any (and any number of) relatives to and substitutions for improvement. E.g. not derived by proceedures. 15. The Animation. Does not have to have to do with an exemplification. 16. The Foundation. Does not have to have to do with an attendation. That is, does not have to be in any relation; though parts of the analogs to derivations may be. 17. The Characterization. Does not have to have to do with continuity. 18. The Activation. Does not have to have to do with participability, e.g. in a description. 19. The Comprehension. Does not have to have to do with organization. 20. The Notion. Does not have to have to do, e.g. with the number's self. 21. The Permutation. Does not have to have, e.g. to do with anything fictionally in a story. 22. The Exacerbation. Does not have to be implyable about, e.g. to have relatives of to-do-with-anything. 23. The Confrontation. Does not have, e.g. to have connections. 24. The Reception. Does not relate. 25. The Manifestation. Does not manifest, e.g. the number's self (yes, different in some ways from just one thing). 26. The Intuition. Cannot be intuited about (which reminds us that this post has gone far beyond the limits of approximation). 27. The Fortuition. Cannot be derived. 28. The Advocation. Largest that can be from structure out of making propositions. 29. The Formulation. Largest that can be from structure out of ideas. 30. The Clarification. Largest that can be from structure out of having a tendency to a property. 31. The Conscription. Largest that can be out of structures. 32. The Exaggeration. Largest that can have meaning to be called "larger". 33. The Intonation. Largest all of whose parts might imply (not all together and in different circumstances) an analog of meaning. 34. The Hemidemisemiquaver. Largest whose parts could be defined to be "together" 35. The Demisemiquaver. Largest whose parts (separately) all are about some analog of "togetherness". 36. The Semiquaver. Largest series that stops (parts to be put together under analog of any earlier analogs) 37. The Quaver. Largest distinct series all with analogs to stopping. 38. The Crochet. Largest series with analogs to distinction. 39. The Minim. Largest analog to series. 40. The Semibreve. Analog-to-largest number (size literally out of comparison). 41. The Breve. The number which is beyond analog-to-largest by most analogy. 42. The Longa. The number whose beyondness is most beyond. 43. The Maxima. The number with the most "most": that is, has the most states/state including about beyondness. 44. The Synchronization. The number with the most (finite) potential supercession(s) 45. The Harmonization. The largest number, that we could reach by techniques like on this list. 46. The Melodization. The largest (finite) allusion. 47. The Composition. The largest (finite) under characterizations (e.g. allusion) 48. The Symphonization. The largest (finite) with any relative of characterizability. Note that 46-48 are based on allusion, and don't describe how we could be directly about the number ourselves. 49. The Opus. The largest with a relative of typicality. 50. The Magnum Opus. The largest with a relative to possibility (I say "with a relative to" because here we're finding analogs to phenomena under gestalt behavior, that only "are" above real existances). 51. The Helion. The largest with a relative of significability (the largest about which there is a potential for identification). 52. The Hermon. The largest with a relative of distinguishability (The largest analog to phenomina which makes a difference). 53. The Cygnithion. The largest that is a relative to phenomina. 54. The Gaeon. The largest that has definitions related to universes. 55. The Arion. The largest with relation to definition. 56. The Jovon. The largest with relations. 57. The Chronon. The largest with a setting. 58. The Uranon. The largest (that can be said to be largest) 59. The Poseidon. What's the greatest argument for relative-to-largest. 60. The Pluton. The all round champion of magnitude that could top this list. If we don't specify getting a specific result, Systems of Order could suggest the following definitions of SO(61-160): You can be part of the derivation of the number granted the special circumstances that: 61. Circumstances inherently generate your number. 62. Circumstances have the invariable criteria in generation of your number. 63. Every circumstance is a criteria causing your number. 64. Every circumstance of a criteria causes your number. 65. All circumstances are factors proceeding under the auspices of your number. 66. All expedition ensuing in a factor (derivation) of your number relates to your number. 67. All expedition expedites your number. 68. There is only expediting your number. 69. Expedite only is expediting your number. 70. Your number is a necessary conclusion. 71. Your number is concluded from all resources. 72. Behavior of resources concludes in your number. 73. All behavior of resources concludes in your number. 74. Resourcefulness concludes in your number. 75. The ability to be a source includes concluding in your number. 76. The nature of sources must conclude in your number. 77. Natures must conclude in your number. 78. Your number is the source of natures. 79. Your number is always sourcing natures. 80. Your number is the origins of all systems (e.g. resulting in natures). 81 Your number is all propensity (e.g. to be in a system). 82 Your number is all tenants (e.g. parts of propensities). 83 Your number is all proclivities to occur. 84 Your number knows no bounds. 85 There are bounds and bounds are no bounds to your number. 86 There is no (possible) definition of a bound relating to your number. 87 There are reasons bounds could not form relating to your number. 88 That there are bounds to your number would not and could not be caused. 89 Boundness to your number is not capable of being considered (is not a concept). 90 Unboundableness of your number is above even non-concepts. 91 Your number is above considerability. 92 Your number is above inspectability. 93 Your number is above (e.g. any way to compare). 94 There is comparison, and your number is above. 95 Comparison only is that your-number-is-above. 96 "Is" (the behavior) only is (the verb) that your-number-is-above. 97 Your-number-is-above whether there is "is" (whether there is "is" opposed to you-dont-exist). 98 Your-number-is-above possibilities is "is" (e.g. possibilities like "is" is, or "is" isn't (which has to be specially defined)). 99 Your-number-is-above is above affirmation. We now define "under control" to mean what would appertained to by principles about what could exist, if the principles that enable your existence didn't necessarily exist. 100 your-number-is-above is above control (e.g. anything about hypotherical existence, even that without you). 101 Your above-control is above anything about hypotherical existences (even those without you) above. 102 Your above control is above if-there-are-hypotherical existences (even those without you). 103 Your above control is above "is", even yours. 104 You control hypothetical existences. 105 The hypothetical controls every hypothetical for you. 106 Every control (including controlling control) is controlled for you. 107 Controlability is controlled for you. 108 The possibility of manifestation of control is controlled for you. 109 Control is controlled for you in the manifestation of control the way you want. 110 The phenominon of control is entirely controlled for you. 111 The state of affairs satisfies all of your criteria about control. 112 Your criteria are satisfied beyond any criteria. 113 Your criteria are satisfied to overridingness over critique. 114 Your criteria are satisfied to overridingness over the nature of critique. 115 Your criteria are satisfied to beyond all override. 116 All hypotheticals' criteria are satisfied in and of that your criteria are beyond overridingly satisfied. 117 The state of affairs is beyond all hypotheticals' satisfaction. 118 The state of affairs is beyond question of satisfaction. 119 The state of affairs is beyond address (is perfect). 120 Every state of affairs is perfect (according to your whim). 121 Perfect satisfaction (found fit by I) of what's in the state of affairs ("stuff") is to beyond override (you define "stuff"). 122 Perfection to and of all stuff is beyond perfect. 123 The nature of the phenenomenon of perfection is beyond perfection. 124 Every nature is beyond perfection. 125 All is beyond perfection. 126 Every interpretation of all (about stuff) is beyond perfection (with you defining interpretation, and stuff). 127 Every possibility of interpretation is beyond perfection (again, with you defining). 128 You define all states of possibleness. 129 Only you define (possibleness). 130 Only you can define (possibleness). 131 The possibility of defining completely suits you. 132 All possibilities completely suit you. 133 Any implication to a possibility can only imply possibilities that completely suit you. 134 Implications completely suit you. 135 The phenomenon of the possibility to implicate completely suits you. 136 That possibilities completely suit you overridingly suits all stuff. 137 That possibilities suit you is overriding about stuff. 138 Stuffness is overridingly that possibilities suit you. 139 The phenomenon "overriding" is that possibilities suit you. 140 Phenomena are suited to you (completely). 141. The functions of phenomina are your functions (are every kind of ideal for you). 142. Any functions are your functions. 143. Measure, e.g. of functions, is yours. 144. Principles of relating to a measure are your principles. 145. Relations are you (are internal to your constitution). 146. Considerations are you and are of you (are internal to and arise from your constitution) (regardless of if the consideration could be done). 147. Appropriatenesses are you and are of you (e.g. of the way you would respond (e.g. to a consideration)). 148. Conclusions are you and are of you (even despite they might be only hypothetically implied). 149. Dogmas (systems of principles (e.g. by which conclusions are reached)) are you and are innately about you. 150. Hydrad. Beliefs (stricture by which signification can be held) are you and are innately of you (even they be impracticable and untenable). 151. Goals (e.g. about numbers) are fulfilled under me-beliefs. 152. Goals are in the body of fulfillment of me-beliefs. 153. Fulfillment is me-beliefs. 154. Fulfillment (me-beliefs) is unmitigable. 155. Fulfillment (me-beliefs) is complete. 156. There could be no fulfillment save me, and fulfillment is complete. 157. There could be no satiation save me, and fulfilledness is completely satiated. 158. Satiation can only be internal to my constitution, and satiation is completely satiated. 159. Completeness is absolute, and internal to my constitution. 160. Thesiad. "If" propositions are absolutely complete, internal to my constitution. Category:Blog posts